naacp says vick should be allowed back

[general counsel]

NAACP has made two basic statements today. First, like anyone else, vick should be allowed to return to the nfl after he serves his time. I agree with that. I dont think that he should be banned for life based on what he did with the dogs, although if the league turns up information that he was running a gambling ring, rather than just personally betting, i might have a different view. Whether a team will sign him is a different story, but i do think that after a suspension he should have the legal right to return.

The second comment from NAACP makes me nuts. They say "whats the difference between hunting, which is ok, and dogfighting, which isnt. They are both sports." The difference is that one is legal and the other is illegal. Just like the scotch vs. weed debate. The NAACP is entitled to their ethical and moral view, although i never once heard a hunter say that the objective of hunting is to torture animals. Kill them sure, but not torture them. The NAACP should work with mike vick and others (such as stephan marbury of the knicks who said the same thing today) to legalize dogfighting if they think its ok. That is their constitutional right and i will defend to the death their ability to make that argument in a free society even if i dont agree with it.

However, unless they get the law changed, the behavior is illegal and stating that its the same as hunting is no defense at all to the actions vick took. If i am driving in a 55mph speed zone and i get pulled over doing 65, does it make any sense to let me off if i tell the police officer that i didnt do anything wrong because the speed limit SHOULD BE 70?

ramming speed to all

general counsel

[r8rh8rmike]

If the NAACP feels Vick should be able to return to the NFL after he serves his time, I'm sure they wouldn't be against concerned, ouraged citizens exercisng their right to protest, boycott, and turn the screws against any NFL team that signed him. It goes both ways. Good luck to Mike hooking up with an NFL team after his stint in the slammer, 'cause IMO it's just not going to happen.

[BigGameMN]

This makes me sick. I don't see how any logical person can call dog fighting a sport. Don't these people know the torture these animals endure from just the training their put through? Not to mention the fights and other grisly details.

And to compare it to hunting is silly. First of all most people who hunt eat what they kill. Second some hunting like deer hunting helps the people by controlling the animal population. Less deer = less people who have wrecks because of deer. Oh and third it's not torture.

[Goldenfleece]

Too bad for Vick that he's so dependent on his speed. Players tend to slow down as they get older, and he'll be losing valuable time here. He probably won't start serving time until the off-season, and they say he's likely to get 12 to 18 months. If he serves 18 months from the end of the regular season, that would have him getting out right before the start of the 2009 season. By then, he'd be a rusty 29 year old who was never that accurate. Even if the league says let him play, I don't know if it would be worth it to anyone to sign him.

[laram0]

It's a great debate whether Vick will be back in the NFL or not. I hate to say it but there will be a team that will want Vick and do what ever it takes to clear his scarred name.

My personal opinion is that he should be banned from the NFL for life. PERIOD!

Is the Pete Rose gambling issue more serious than this Vick catastrophe?

[BigGameMN]

I almost 100% confident that he will never be back as a QB . A few teams may want to see what he can do in a "slash" type of role, kinda like Kordell Stewart. The only way he ever gets back as a QB is if Al Davis is still running the Raiders.

[AvengerRam]

Apparently, the NAACP now stands for the "National Association for the Advancement of Cruelty to Pooches."

[itsguud]

I think he should be allwoed back in...

I'm more liberal then most everyone on issues so most... won't agree with me but I always thought that the American judical and criminal systems were based on the reformation of troubled individules. If that is true, and I think it is at least supposed to be the way that the system in the US works, then shouldn't you all be giving Vick a chance to "change"? It seems to me that you are all jumping on Vick and how much you hate him, which is fine... right now. But if all of you agree and say that "he should never be allowed back into the NFL" then aren't you all part of the bigger problem?... You've all condemned the guy for life and he hasn't even been sentenced yet.

My question to everyone on this fourm who has come out-right to say that Vick should never be allowed back in the NFL; What is the point of your said criminal system if not for reform?

[HUbison]

Originally Posted by itsguud

I always thought that the American judical and criminal systems were based on the reformation of troubled individules.

Originally Posted by Webster's

Criminal justice - the system of legislation, practices, and organizations, used by government or the state, which are all directed to maintain social control, deter and control crime, and sanctioning those who violate laws.

Originally Posted by President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice (1967). The Challenge of Crime in a Free Society. U.S. Government Printing Office.

the criminal justice system is the means for society to "enforce the standards of conduct necessary to protect individuals and the community".

The U.S. criminal system's purpose has nothing to do with the reformation of criminals. It has more to do with the removal of criminals and the restraint of criminals than the reformation of criminals.

Having said that, the NFL is not the U.S. criminal system, and as such, I disagree with those who want a lifetime ban for Michael Vick. I don't like the guy, and what he did is one of the most disgusting thing I've ever heard. However, when he has finished serving his appointed time in the pen, I have no problem with him returning to the NFL. Let the NFL hand him a suspension, but not a lifetime ban.

[Goldenfleece]

Originally Posted by itsguud

But if all of you agree and say that "he should never be allowed back into the NFL" then aren't you all part of the bigger problem?... You've all condemned the guy for life and he hasn't even been sentenced yet.

My question to everyone on this fourm who has come out-right to say that Vick should never be allowed back in the NFL; What is the point of your said criminal system if not for reform?

The purpose of the criminal justice system and the purpose of the National Football League are two very different things. There are a lot of ideas out there about what the point of the criminal justice system should be: rehabilitation, punishment, deterrence, etc. However, the NFL is predominately about entertainment, and I don't think it's unreasonable to say that people might not want to watch a "sports hero" who seems like a scumbag. I mean are we really to expect that after serving a year or so, Vick is going to come out a whole new man. This isn't like one isolated stupid mistake (like Wroten getting caught with marijuana); it looks like he bankrolled the whole operation. According to Vick's father, Vick was staging these fights in his parents' garage and backyard circa 2001. I'm not saying this guy ought to suffer his whole life for it; I'm just saying this is not a guy I would root for. I wouldn't look up to him. I wouldn't want him on my favorite team.

[RamFan_Til_I_Die]

If this were steven Jackson, LT, Peyton Manning, Chad Johnson, someone of that caliber, they'd be back. This is Michael "I couldn't complete a pass to save my life" Vick. I really think his days as a starter were numbered before this happened anyway. After possibly 2 years away from the league, his skills will have diminished even further, so from a skill standpoint there would be few takers. Add the dog killing/gambling into the mix and he's even less desireable.

Now on to the rehabilitation. Assuming the alleged killings and the methods of killing are true,how can you rehabilitate someone like that? What type of sick individual would take a dog and beat it to death, strangle it, electrecute it, drown it, or hang it? If a dog was critically injured and unable to ever fight again, couldn't you just end it quickly with a bullet to the head or something? Only a sick, twisted person who delights in torture and killing would do it the way Vick and his cohorts did. They say this type of animal slaying is the step below the killing of humans and that serial killers and murderers started out this way. Once you've crossed that line, can you come back? I'd have to say the answer is no.

[r8rh8rmike]

Originally Posted by itsguud

My question to everyone on this fourm who has come out-right to say that Vick should never be allowed back in the NFL; What is the point of your said criminal system if not for reform?

I haven't seen many here call for Vick to get a lifetime ban, but those who do have compelling reasons IMO. I've said it before and I'll say it again, I think this guy is pure evil, beyond rehabilitation.

My question to you is this, if Vick was involved in a big time gambling operation with payments in the tens of thousands of dollars as has been reported, should he get a lifetime ban?

Originally Posted by RamFan_Til_I_Die

Now on to the rehabilitation. Assuming the alleged killings and the methods of killing are true,how can you rehabilitate someone like that? What type of sick individual would take a dog and beat it to death, strangle it, electrecute it, drown it, or hang it? If a dog was critically injured and unable to ever fight again, couldn't you just end it quickly with a bullet to the head or something? Only a sick, twisted person who delights in torture and killing would do it the way Vick and his cohorts did. They say this type of animal slaying is the step below the killing of humans and that serial killers and murderers started out this way. Once you've crossed that line, can you come back? I'd have to say the answer is no.

Well said Josh.

[itsguud]

Excellent... firstly, my opinion on Vick hasn't been given. I noticed some of you questioning.. or perhaps more correctly stated, thinking that I am defending Vick. My purpose for writing what I did was to simply spark debate... it worked. (PS I knew and hoped HUBsion would be the first response, always a good debate with him).

Now, as I went online and looked it up, the United States Criminal Justice System is intened to help in the rehabilitaion of troubled individules (I seen this on a government website FYI). The NFL may not be the criminal justice system, however as I have already lost a debate earlier this off-season vs. HUB and a couple of others, on the sole principal that: "the NFL is run under the US Law"... if that is indeed the case then how, can the NFL justify not allowing Vick to play in the NFL again... ever! That would truely be hypocritical.

How can an organization run under a Law system, as the NFL under the US, which has been pointed out to me in a past argument, which was about marjuana, decide that this player can't be reformed?

It doesn't and shouldn't matter just the degree of how sick a person is, you can't say that one person is gone past the point of reform, which is what you are basically saying.

I understand completely if you, me and ever single fan to ever watch the NFL doesn't want Vick to play there again, but this is terribly unfair and is how political systems fail... some people would call this a loop hole.

Think about it this way, if it is allowed to swing this way for the "good" of the people, then who says it can't swing the other way, for the "good" of the criminal? And don't jump on me for saying this, criminal Lawyers will certainly pick up on it if I did. This is also the reason why this day and age, criminals who break into a home can after the fact sue the homeowner for injury if they get injured while committing the act. (This has happened in the States; we studied a case like this in Law this smester).

Please, feel free and I hope that you all continue the debate, however read carefully what I have written and don't post without understanding exactly what I have said.

EXCELLENT DEBATE RAM FANS, let no-one ever say that Ram Fans are stupid or any of the like.

[HUbison]

I have already lost a debate earlier this off-season

If we gain knowledge from each other, there's no winners or losers.......just two better informed parties.

[Goldenfleece]

I think we usually think of the law as limited in scope. If there was a law that said you cannot discriminate based on criminal record, then I think you'd have a very good point. However, in the U.S. a convicted felon loses his right to vote, and this often extends well after his sentence is over. Rather than U.S. law barring discrimination, it allows companies to request background checks to see the criminal record. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that the reasoning here is that a criminal record is as much a part of a person's professional background as their education, employment record, etc.

In my opinion, the onus on the system is to prevent Vick from breaking the law. It is not their duty to make Vick a better person. The time in prison may convince him it isn't prudent for him to continue doing these things, but why should we believe that it will make him change his mind about what he thinks is right or wrong?

I do think a person can reform, but it is not the burden of his employer to see that it happens. He is in an industry where public image is huge. He has already tarnished his own image with the Ron Mexico affair, and now this breaks. If he wants to reform his ways, the burden is on him to demonstrate that he has seen the light. The problem is that Vick doesn't seem to think what he did was wrong, and when he gets out we all expect him to claim to have seen the error of his ways just so he can start playing ball again. He lied to the commissioner. He lied to the owner of his team. So I think that he has an uphill battle to regain his credibility and then to convince them that he will not do anything else to damage their organization's reputation. If he truly reforms and can convince the public he is serious, maybe he'll play again. I think it is completely fair that this burden is on him, though. After all, he alone is responsible for his decisions.